This is historical material, "frozen in time."
The web site is no longer updated and links to external web sites and some internal pages will not work.
This is historical material, "frozen in time."
The web site is no longer updated and links to external web sites and some internal pages will not work.
Getting Federal Computers Ready for
2000
Report of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget
February 6, 1997
The year 2000 computer problem is a seemingly simple
one: assuring that computers will recognize the correct year when the year 2000 arrives. If
software programs are not prepared to handle the change of date on January 1, 2000, there is a
risk to government information systems and the programs they support.
This report responds to 1997 appropriations language
which directs OMB to submit to the House Committee on Appropriations, the House Committee
on Government Reform and Oversight, and the House Science Committee a report which
includes: a cost estimate to ensure software code date field conversion by the year 2000; a
planned strategy to ensure that all information technology, as defined by the Information
Technology Management Reform Act of 1996, purchased by an agency will operate in 2000
without technical modifications; and, a time table for implementation of the planned
strategy.
The report is to be submitted with the President's
1998 budget. (Committee Report accompanying Public Law 104-208.)
Background
People often use short hand to describe the year. When
asked what year it is, we answer "97".
When we fill in the date on paper forms we write 2/2/97. The same approach was used in
designing many computer systems.
With the arrival of the year 2000, people will know that
the year "00" stands for 2000. However, the hardware and software in many
computer systems will not understand this new meaning.
Unless they are fixed or replaced, they will fail at the turn of the century in one of three
ways:
they will reject legitimate entries, or
they will compute erroneous results, or
they will simply not run.
Many systems which compare dates to decide which is
earlier will no longer work.
Comparisons of dates permeate Federal computer systems -- they are how inventories are
maintained (e.g., last in, first out), how the order of filings is handled (e.g., first come, first
served), and how eligibility is determined (e.g., an applicant must have filed before a certain
date).
Systems which calculate length of time also may not
compute accurately. Computations of length of time are common in Federal computer systems --
they are how benefits are computed (e.g., based on length of time), how eligibility is determined
(e.g., based on length of service), and how expiration dates are calculated (e.g., expires after three
years).
There are other possible effects of the date change in
computer software, depending on the assumptions made and programming technique used by the
designer of the software. For example, information relevant to a year could be found by using the
year to find the information in a table.
For example, information about 1997 would be at the 97th location in the table. Such a technique
would fail in the year "00" because there is no 0th location.
Impact
The potential impact on Federal programs if this problem
is not corrected is substantial and potentially very serious. Federal agencies are therefore taking
steps to ensure a smooth transition, and fixing the problem is generating a high level of interest
and energy. The challenge for the next three years is to manage that interest and energy
effectively and efficiently so that the systems upon which Americans all depend will operate
smoothly through the year 2000 and beyond.
There are several unique characteristics of this problem
that shape the Federal strategy for addressing it. First, it has an unmovable deadline. Unlike other
computer development or maintenance activities, the deadline for fixing the year 2000 problem is
not set administratively, but by the problem itself. Repairs must therefore be fully tested and
implemented by December 31, 1999. This characteristic makes time the single
most critical resource.
Second, unlike a normal system development or
maintenance activity, many systems must be tackled concurrently. Comparisons and
computations using dates permeate computer systems within the Federal government, throughout
State and local governments, and in the private sector.
There is thus a real potential for a substantial strain on another key resource --
expertise.
Third, complexity is increased by
concurrent changes to multiple systems and elements within a system (e.g., the operating
system). Because computer systems inter-operate and share data, the modified systems must be
tested together. Furthermore, all of these changes must be made and tested while the current
systems continue to operate.
Chief Information Officers
Federal management of information technology has
dramatically changed in the past year as a result of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 (formerly
known as the Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1996) (40 U.S.C. 1401 et.
seq.). That Act established Chief Information Officers (CIOs) in each Federal agency with
responsibility for maintaining a sound information technology architecture for the agency. In
addition, Executive Order No. 13011 (July 16, 1996) established the Chief Information Officers
Council, chaired by OMB, as the principal interagency forum to improve agency practices on the
use of information technology. Year 2000 issues have been discussed at every CIO Council
meeting to date. Agency CIOs acting within their agencies and through the CIO
Council will provide the leadership and assure that the work is done to address the year 2000
computer problem.
In 1995, OMB formed an interagency working group on
the year 2000, chaired by a representative of the Social Security Administration. That working
group was recently adopted as an official working group of the CIO Council.
Planned Strategy
The Government's strategy is predicated on three
considerations.
First, senior agency managers will take whatever action is
necessary to address the problem once they are aware of its potential consequences. Those
consequences would, after all, directly affect their ability to carry out the agency's
essential functions.
Second, there can and will not be a single solution.
Solving this problem requires technicians and engineers to write or revise software code and to
replace hardware. A "silver bullet" is a logical impossibility. There is only a need for
hard work, strategically directed, and plenty of it.
Third, given the limited amount of time, emphasis will be
on mission critical systems. In many agencies such systems are large and complex, which means
they will require the most time and be the most challenging to fix.
The Federal strategy relies on the newly established CIOs
to direct that work and to follow industry's best practices. Those best practices include
five phases:
raising management awareness of the problem,
assessing the scope of the problem by inventorying systems and deciding which ones to change, replace or discard,
renovating the systems to be changed,
validating and testing the changed systems, and
implementing the revised systems (including developing a contingency plan).
Detailed steps in each phase have been developed by the
interagency working group on the year 2000 and are available for agencies on a GSA sponsored
year 2000 home page at http://www.itpolicy.gsa.gov.
Schedule
OMB, in consultation with the CIO Council, has set
government-wide milestones (shown below) for completion of the majority of the work
in each phase of agency year 2000 activities.
These phases, while sequential, overlap. For example, the awareness phase continues throughout
the entire process.
Government-wide Year 2000
Milestones
Phase
Completion Measure
Completion Date
Awareness
Agency Strategy Approved by CIO
12/96
Assessment
Inventory and Scope Completed
System Plans & Schedules Approved by CIO
3/97
6/97
Renovation
Coding Completed
12/98
Validation
Management Sign-off
1/99
Implementation
Integrated Testing Completed
11/99
Attachment A to this report shows major agencies' current progress and plans for
completing each phase. In many cases the plans consolidate milestones from individual components
and systems within the agency. Agency CIOs are taking steps to accelerate their year 2000
activities to meet these goals.
Cost
OMB Memorandum No. 97-02, "Funding
Information Systems Investments"
(October 25, 1996), outlines the policy criteria to be used in making funding decisions for all
investments in major information systems. One of those criteria is that the investment be
consistent with the agency's year 2000 compliance plan. In addition, agencies are funding
year 2000 work by redirecting resources from other planned activities (e.g. modernization),
because it does not make sense to spend money on upgrades if the basic system will fail to
operate. These policies are reflected in funding decisions for major information systems in the
President's 1998 budget.
Agencies estimate that they will spend $2.3
billion between FY 1996 and FY 2000 on the year 2000 computer problem. Attachment B
includes agency-by-agency estimates of the cost to ensure that systems will work smoothly
through the year 2000. The estimates cover the costs of identifying necessary changes, evaluating
the cost effectiveness of making those changes (fix or scrap decisions), making changes, testing
systems, and contingencies for failure recovery. The estimates do not include the costs of
upgrades or replacements that would otherwise occur as part of the normal system life cycle.
They also do not include the Federal share of the costs for state information systems that support
Federal programs. The figures provided by agencies are preliminary estimates. Better estimates
will become available after all agencies have completed the assessment phase.
Government-wide Action
Five government-wide actions complement individual agency efforts:
OMB is raising the awareness of the most senior managers in
Federal agencies to the magnitude of this problem;
The Chief Information Officers Council and the interagency working group on
the year 2000 are promoting the sharing of management and technical expertise;
The government is acquiring only year 2000 compliant information
technology, using standard contract language;
OMB and the CIO Council are removing barriers that could impede
technicians fixing existing systems; and
OMB is monitoring agencies' progress to assure they are on
schedule.
1. Raising Awareness
The President's Management Council, comprised
of the chief operating officers of major departments and agencies has discussed the year 2000
problem on several occasions. OMB has been meeting indivi- dually with those chief operating
officers to ensure they appreciate the risk this problem poses and the difficulty of solving it.
Raising awareness is a continuing challenge. OMB will
continue to assist the agencies in this area as new senior officials come into the government
during 1997. The recent inclusion by the General Accounting Office of year 2000 on its list of
"high risk" areas will also assist in focusing attention to the immediacy of the
problem.
2. Sharing Expertise
Some Federal agencies have considerable experience working on this problem.
The Social Security Administration, for example, has been actively engaged since 1989. The
interagency working group is taking advantage of such experience and promoting the sharing of
expertise and solutions across agencies.
The interagency working group has also developed a list
of products that are being used by Federal agencies, along with information about whether they
will work through the year 2000. That list is available on the year 2000 World Wide Web page
for Federal managers' use. The Defense Information Systems Agency has developed a similar list
of generally available products, which is also available from the year 2000 Web page. This
information is invaluable to managers as they evaluate the extent of the year 2000 problem in
their systems.
The President's budget includes resources to
establish a dedicated year 2000 program office at GSA. Such an office will provide a core of
expertise government- wide to assist agencies in formulating approaches and evaluating options
to solve the problem in their systems.
3. Acquire Only Products that are Year 2000 Compliant
At the recommendation of the CIO Council and the
interagency working group, agencies have stopped acquiring information technology that will not
work in the year 2000. Regulatory language to effect this strategy was developed by the
interagency working group on the year 2000 and the CIO Council, approved by the Federal
Acquisition Regulation Councils, and published in Federal Acquisition Circular 90-45
(December 1996).
That language defines year 2000 compliant to mean
"information technology that accurately processes date/time data
(including, but not limited to, calculating, comparing, and sequencing) from, into, and between
the twentieth and twenty-first centuries and the years 1999 and 2000 and leap-year
calculations. Furthermore, year 2000 compliant information technology, when used
in combination with other information technology, shall accurately process date/time
data if the other information technology properly exchanges date/time data with
it."
Finally, GSA is revising its Multiple Award Schedule
contracts to assure that products on those schedules identify whether they are, or when they will
be, year 2000 compliant. This will help agencies to acquire only year 2000 products from those
schedules.
4. Removing Barriers
Solutions to the year 2000 problem in operational
systems require technicians to undertake the time-consuming work of analyzing and fixing
systems. There are, however, things that can be done to speed this work. The interagency
working group is helping to identify such measures, and the CIO Council is working
expeditiously to implement them. One example is specifying a standard way to communicate
dates among agencies. At the urging of the interagency working group, the National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) amended the Federal digital date standard to a
4-digit years and strongly encouraged agencies to follow it for data interchange among
agencies.(1) In January 1997 the CIO Council adopted the NIST standard for all data
exchanges among agencies. Based on common industry practice, the NIST standard will
probably become a formally adopted standard through the normal standards-development
process. The Council adopted it now because agencies can not afford to wait on a lengthy formal
process. Technicians need answers today.
5. Monitoring Progress
OMB will require agencies to report their progress
quarterly. The interagency working group and the CIO Council are helping OMB develop that
reporting requirement. This report will be used by OMB to monitor agency activity to assure that
year 2000 activities remain on schedule. With the assistance of GSA, OMB will publish a
summary of these reports within one month of their receipt.
Conclusion
The Federal government is making considerable progress in addressing the year 2000
problem in Federal computer systems. We are also well aware of the work that has yet to be
done, and appreciate that there is a limited amount of time left to do it -- less than 35 months.
But the new CIOs are working hard to accelerate agency activities to address this challenge, and
we are confident that the problem will be solved without disruption of Federal programs.
Att. A
Agency Progress and Plans for Achieving Year 2000 Compliance
Agency
Awareness
Assessment
Renovation
Validation Scope
Implementation Schedule
Agriculture
11/96
4/97
6/97
9/98
9/99
10/99
Commerce
8/96
12/96
3/97
12/98
1/99
10/99
Defense
12/96
3/97
12/97
12/98
6/99
11/99
Air Force
6/96
3/97
5/97
1/98
7/98
12/99
Army
12/96
3/97
3/97
9/98
12/98
10/99
Navy
12/96
3/97
12/97
12/98
6/99
11/99
Education
12/96
2/97
6/97
9/98
9/98
3/99
Energy
6/96
1/97
1/97
1/99
1/99
12/99
HHS
11/96
1/97
6/97
12/98
1/99
11/99
HUD
11/96
4/97
6/97
12/98
7/99
11/99
Interior
12/96
4/97
7/97
12/98
1/99
11/99
Justice
3/96
9/96
9/96
12/99
12/99
12/99
Labor
12/96
3/97
6/97
12/98
6/99
12/99
State
6/96
12/96
6/97
9/98*
10/98*
8/99*
Transportation
12/96
8/97
12/97
12/98
1/99
11/99
Treasury
5/96
4/97
7/97
12/98
12/98
11/99
VA
1/97
1/98
2/98
11/98
12/99
12/99
AID
11/96
3/97
6/97
11/98
7/99
7/99
EPA
12/96
3/97
6/97
12/98
1/99
11/99
FEMA
12/96
3/97
6/97
12/98
1/99
11/99
GSA
11/96
3/97
6/97
12/98
1/99
10/99
NASA
1/97
2/97
3/97
6/99
7/99
12/99
NSF
9/96
1/97
6/97
6/98
12/98
12/99
NRC
6/96
6/97
9/97
3/99
4/99
11/99
OPM
12/96
3/97*
6/97*
12/98
11/99
12/99
SBA**
4/96
6/96
9/96
12/98
12/98
12/98
SSA
3/96
3/96
5/96
11/98
12/98
11/99
-- Applies to Mission-critical systemsonly
* -- Replacing system through planned migration to client/server environment
ESTIMATED AGENCY YEAR 2000 OBLIGATIONS
(Dollars in Millions, by Fiscal Year)
Agency
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
TOTAL
Agriculture
2.6
20.0
34.3
26.6
5.7
89.2
Commerce
2.3
16.2
33.6
28.3
9.3
89.7
Defense
Air Force
0.0
96.5
259.7
14.8
0.0
371.0
Army
0.0
87.0
87.0
44.0
0.0
218.0
Navy
3.0
24.0
26.0
22.0
15.0
90.0
Defense - Other
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
290.6
Education
0.0
0.2
3.0
4.0
0.0
7.2
Energy
1.8
21.2
44.7
43.5
16.9
128.1
HHS
27.7
42.9
14.5
5.6
0.0
90.7
HUD
0.7
11.0
35.0
15.0
6.2
67.9
Interior
0.2
2.6
4.5
2.2
1.8
11.3
Justice
0.3
2.5
8.9
10.3
0.2
22.1
Labor
1.7
5.3
4.6
2.2
1.5
15.2
State
0.5
47.6
56.4
29.1
1.6
135.2
Transportation
0.2
12.4
22.1
39.7
6.1
80.4
Treasury
1.3
55.0
102.0
119.1
41.0
318.5
VA
4.0
49.0
49.0
42.0
0.0
144.0
AID
0.0
0.2
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.2
EPA
0.8
3.3
6.8
5.6
2.3
18.8
FEMA
3.8
4.4
3.0
3.2
1.2
15.6
GSA
0.2
0.6
0.6
0.2
0.0
1.6
NASA
0.0
6.6
14.4
10.6
1.1
32.6
NSF
0.0
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.0
0.6
NRC
N/A
2.6
2.9
2.9
0.9
9.3
OPM
1.7
0.3
0.9
0.6
0.2
3.7
SBA
2.7
2.3
1.9
0.0
0.0
6.9
SSA
2.2
15.4
9.5
6.0
0.0
33.1
TOTAL
57.7
529.1
826.4
477.6
110.9
2292.4
-- Applies to Mission-critical systemsonly
* -- Replacing system through planned migration to client/server environment
Notes:
1) The estimates cover "the costs of identifying necessary changes, evaluating the cost
effectiveness of making those changes (fix or scrap decisions), making changes, testing systems,
and contingencies for failure recovery." They do not include "obligations for upgrades or
replacements that would otherwise occur as part of the normal system lifecycle." (OMB Circular
A-11, Section 43.2(c))
2) These are preliminary estimates only. More accurate estimates
will become available after agencies complete the assessment phase. These estimates do not
include the Federal share of the costs for state information systems that support Federal
programs. For example, the Agriculture total does not include the potential 50 percent in Federal
matching funds to be provided to states by the Food and Consumer Service to correct year 2000
problems. Similarly, while Labor's FY 1998 President's Budget includes $200 million for the
states to correct year 2000 problems in State unemployment insurance systems, that amount is
not included here.
